To Speak with the Other—To Let the Other Speak: Paul Celan’s Poetry and the Hermeneutical Challenge of Mitsprechen

Humanities Pub Date : 2024-04-24 DOI:10.3390/h13030066
Alexandra Richter
{"title":"To Speak with the Other—To Let the Other Speak: Paul Celan’s Poetry and the Hermeneutical Challenge of Mitsprechen","authors":"Alexandra Richter","doi":"10.3390/h13030066","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This essay explores the notion of Mitsprechen or “with-speaking” in Paul Celan’s poetry. “With-speaking” supposes that voices in the poems actively participate and engage in a dialogue that goes beyond traditional hermeneutic frameworks. Celan’s notion of col-loquy, distinct from the conventional sense of dialogue, challenges the separation between author and interpreter, rendering the traditional concept of intertextuality inadequate. The poems, according to Celan, give voice to human destinies, making texts audible as the voices of others. This vocal dimension of Celan’s poetry has prompted extensive discussion among philosophers, particularly in France. Levinas, Blanchot, and Derrida, influenced by German phenomenology and hermeneutics, critically examine the ethical implications of speaking “about” the other. They challenge traditional hermeneutical practices, emphasizing the responsibility of interpreters to respect the unique and untranslatable character of individual voices. This critique extends to Protestant categories of interpretation, drawing on alternative Jewish perspectives on being-in-the-world and alterity. The text explores the tensions inherent in speaking “for” or “in the name of” others, especially in the context of interpreting Celan’s work, raising questions about maintaining the fundamental difference and distance that otherness implies. The discussion concludes by highlighting Werner Hamacher’s formulation of a new philology that disrupts hermeneutical violence, influenced by the critiques of Blanchot, Levinas, and Derrida, and offering an alternative way of addressing the particular challenges posed by Celan’s poetry.","PeriodicalId":509613,"journal":{"name":"Humanities","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Humanities","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/h13030066","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This essay explores the notion of Mitsprechen or “with-speaking” in Paul Celan’s poetry. “With-speaking” supposes that voices in the poems actively participate and engage in a dialogue that goes beyond traditional hermeneutic frameworks. Celan’s notion of col-loquy, distinct from the conventional sense of dialogue, challenges the separation between author and interpreter, rendering the traditional concept of intertextuality inadequate. The poems, according to Celan, give voice to human destinies, making texts audible as the voices of others. This vocal dimension of Celan’s poetry has prompted extensive discussion among philosophers, particularly in France. Levinas, Blanchot, and Derrida, influenced by German phenomenology and hermeneutics, critically examine the ethical implications of speaking “about” the other. They challenge traditional hermeneutical practices, emphasizing the responsibility of interpreters to respect the unique and untranslatable character of individual voices. This critique extends to Protestant categories of interpretation, drawing on alternative Jewish perspectives on being-in-the-world and alterity. The text explores the tensions inherent in speaking “for” or “in the name of” others, especially in the context of interpreting Celan’s work, raising questions about maintaining the fundamental difference and distance that otherness implies. The discussion concludes by highlighting Werner Hamacher’s formulation of a new philology that disrupts hermeneutical violence, influenced by the critiques of Blanchot, Levinas, and Derrida, and offering an alternative way of addressing the particular challenges posed by Celan’s poetry.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
与他人对话--让他人说话:保罗-策兰的诗歌与 Mitsprechen 的诠释学挑战
这篇文章探讨了保罗-策兰诗歌中的 Mitsprechen 或 "一起说 "的概念。"与-说 "假定诗歌中的声音积极参与和进行超越传统诠释学框架的对话。策兰的 "对话"(col-loquy)概念有别于传统意义上的对话,它挑战了作者与解释者之间的分离,使传统的互文性概念变得不充分。策兰认为,诗歌为人类命运发声,使文本成为他人的声音。策兰诗歌的这种声音维度引起了哲学家们的广泛讨论,尤其是在法国。勒维纳斯、布兰肖和德里达受德国现象学和诠释学的影响,批判性地审视了 "谈论 "他人的伦理意义。他们挑战传统的诠释学实践,强调诠释者有责任尊重个体声音的独特性和不可翻译性。这种批判延伸到了新教的诠释范畴,并借鉴了犹太人关于 "存在于世界中 "和 "改变性 "的另类观点。文章探讨了 "为 "或 "以 "他人的名义说话所固有的紧张关系,尤其是在阐释策兰作品的背景下,提出了关于保持他者性所暗示的根本差异和距离的问题。讨论最后强调了维尔纳-哈马赫受布朗肖、列维纳斯和德里达批评的影响,提出了一种破坏解释学暴力的新语言学,为解决策兰诗歌提出的特殊挑战提供了另一种方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Cosmopolitanism Reinvented: Intercultural Encounters between Sino–African American Intellectuals in Early and Mid-20th Century China Between Sensibility and History: The Count de Rethel (1779) by Georgiana Spencer Cavendish, Duchess of Devonshire “Except for This Hysteria, She Is the Perfect Woman”: Women and Hysteria in An Inconvenient Wife “From Out the Portals of My Brain”: William Blake’s Partus Mentis and Imaginative Regeneration From Agni to Agency: Sita’s Liberation in Arni and Chitrakar’s Graphic Retelling of the Ramayana
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1